a cool cynical take on HP

[TotallyHuman]

Harry Potter was a series I was introduced through the movies which I didn't like all that much and, thus, never read the original source.
I have given a fanfiction of it, again and again, a try recently, however - and it showed a point of view that fit what I have seen in the movies that I watched on the TV when I still had it (good riddance) very well.
Dumbledore manipulating Harry - a young kid - for his political agendas, Voldemort being insane not because he was, but because his magic fucked him up in the head, the Slytherins not hating on the muggleborne for being born to an inferiour species - but because the govt tramples on their traditions in favour of not scaring the muggleborne and even the people needing wands because the system cripples people's magical potential through limiting their sources of knowledge such as forbidding practicing magic outside school (yay censorship) - as a way to control the magical population.
I actually felt like reading the original after that. How true are these statements, however? To those who actually read the original source.

 

[SailusGebel]

Are these statements true? If you want to believe in them, yes.

 

[APieceOfRock]

Sounds like something a lowly muggleborn would say!

 

[Agentt]

govt tramples on their traditions in favour of not scaring the muggleborne and even the people needing wands because the system cripples people's magical potential through limiting their sources of knowledge such as forbidding practicing magic outside school (yay censorship) - as a way to control the magical population.

the government themselves hate muggles, the only reason they don't kill us is because they consider us not worth the effort. rest is true

 

[AliceShiki]

How true are these statements, however? To those who actually read the original source.

None of the statements are backed by the source material, but none of them are disproved by the source material either.

As in, it can be true if you want it to be true, but it can also be false if you want it to be false.

Up to the reader's interpretation, really.

... I will say though, that this is not how the book portrays those things. Like, Slytherin is evil because it's evil in the books. They're just portrayed as evil without any justification given to why they're evil.

 

[Zirrboy]

but because the govt tramples on their traditions in favour of not scaring the muggleborne and even the people needing wands because the system cripples people's magical potential through limiting their sources of knowledge such as forbidding practicing magic outside school (yay censorship) - as a way to control the magical population.

Freedom me leveraging my advantages vs oppression others doing it to me.

 

[gaylolis]

 

[Suchende558]

tbh fanon hp > actual hp LOLL i remember watching the movies as a kid and then reading the obvious racism as a teenager it was heart breaking fr

 

[TheEldritchGod]

Darn. I was hoping it was a cool cynical take on hit points.

 

[MarukiLikesMikey]

Hi, i dont know much about harry potter, but I do like wizards and like SAO animes and movies, shows, and animes like that-

 

[T.K._Paradox]

Harry Potter was a series I was introduced through the movies which I didn't like all that much and, thus, never read the original source.
I have given a fanfiction of it, again and again, a try recently, however - and it showed a point of view that fit what I have seen in the movies that I watched on the TV when I still had it (good riddance) very well.
Dumbledore manipulating Harry - a young kid - for his political agendas, Voldemort being insane not because he was, but because his magic fucked him up in the head, the Slytherins not hating on the muggleborne for being born to an inferiour species - but because the govt tramples on their traditions in favour of not scaring the muggleborne and even the people needing wands because the system cripples people's magical potential through limiting their sources of knowledge such as forbidding practicing magic outside school (yay censorship) - as a way to control the magical population.
I actually felt like reading the original after that. How true are these statements, however? To those who actually read the original source.

This is looking way too deep into the story.

Dumbledore wasn't using Harry for political gains, but rather to eventually be used as a way to finally kill Voldemort.

The Slytherins in general were never even evil, just the Slytherins we were shown typical were antagonists to our main trio. Hell, one of the most popular Red Herrings in fiction, Severus Snape, was actually a great boon for Harry.

The 'purebloods' hate on mixed and muggleborn people because it is a built in caste system. Similar on how Old Money rich folk will look down upon people that married into wealth, or is Young Money.

Also the whole practicing magic outside of school thing is a survival tactic.

This mystical and magical world is very venerable to the muggles they look down upon.

They really don't have much going for them except for the ability to keep up the illusion and power.

 

[MarukiLikesMikey]

Wow. Very cool and formal =v=

 

[ACertainPassingUser]

Harry Potter is simply comparable to Shounen and Seinen fantasy, Not much realistic logic can be applied to them.

Albeit it's not going to entertain politic-aware 21-25yo++ adults much, you can't just shove it into the hands of 10 year old children either.

It has PG rating until "Goblet of Fire", where it's becoming PG-12/PG-13 depends on where you live. Parent must guide the children while watching it.

As results, It's essentially teenage marketed story that still has fun factor for kids while not destroying too much logic for adults who're guiding the children while watching it. A.k.a family friendly film.

And politics trend and view has changed quite a lot since the book release, film release, and our LGBT and COVID 19 pandemic era.

So, I don't really want to take it seriously anyway. It's just a children story, like it say on the rating, albeit need parent guidance.

 

[T.K._Paradox]

Harry Potter is simply comparable to Shounen and Seinen fantasy, Not much realistic logic can be applied to them.

Albeit it's not going to entertain politic-aware 21-25yo++ adults much, you can't just shove it into the hands of 10 year old children either.

It has PG rating until "Goblet of Fire", where it's becoming PG-12/PG-13 depends on where you live. Parent must guide the children while watching it.

As results, It's essentially teenage marketed story that still has fun factor for kids while not destroying too much logic for adults who're guiding the children while watching it. A.k.a family friendly film.

And politics trend and view has changed quite a lot since the book release, film release, and our LGBT and COVID 19 pandemic era.

So, I don't really want to take it seriously anyway. It's just a children story, like it say on the rating, albeit need parent guidance.

"It is just a children's story..."

My man, you do know it can be enjoyed by people of all ages right (kinda of the series intended point)? Also, generally speaking the Harry Potter series matured the further into the books you went in.

It dealt with mature themes and life lessons through out the entire series.

Your dismissal of the story, as well as the entire Shonen and Seinen genre, simply because it isn't politically charged and doesn't follow other formats for 'Adult series' is just straight up silly.

 

[Lloyd]

Ye for wizard president.

 

[Thief]

I

Harry Potter was a series I was introduced through the movies which I didn't like all that much and, thus, never read the original source.
I have given a fanfiction of it, again and again, a try recently, however - and it showed a point of view that fit what I have seen in the movies that I watched on the TV when I still had it (good riddance) very well.
Dumbledore manipulating Harry - a young kid - for his political agendas, Voldemort being insane not because he was, but because his magic fucked him up in the head, the Slytherins not hating on the muggleborne for being born to an inferiour species - but because the govt tramples on their traditions in favour of not scaring the muggleborne and even the people needing wands because the system cripples people's magical potential through limiting their sources of knowledge such as forbidding practicing magic outside school (yay censorship) - as a way to control the magical population.
I actually felt like reading the original after that. How true are these statements, however? To those who actually read the original source.

I've only the prisinor of askeban so idk? I don't like harry that much though hahaha same with movies I've only watched prisinor of askeban till now

 

[SirItio]

Harry Potter was a series I was introduced through the movies which I didn't like all that much and, thus, never read the original source.
I have given a fanfiction of it, again and again, a try recently, however - and it showed a point of view that fit what I have seen in the movies that I watched on the TV when I still had it (good riddance) very well.
Dumbledore manipulating Harry - a young kid - for his political agendas, Voldemort being insane not because he was, but because his magic fucked him up in the head, the Slytherins not hating on the muggleborne for being born to an inferiour species - but because the govt tramples on their traditions in favour of not scaring the muggleborne and even the people needing wands because the system cripples people's magical potential through limiting their sources of knowledge such as forbidding practicing magic outside school (yay censorship) - as a way to control the magical population.
I actually felt like reading the original after that. How true are these statements, however? To those who actually read the original source.

This is a popular HP fanon trope mainly (I think) conjured by young adults and teenagers who're trying to apply adult logic to a kids' movie.
Children -- Dumbledore/The Weasleys/Harry/Gryffindors are good, Voldemort/Slytherins are evil.
Adults -- same as above, and I won't try to read too much into it, because it's a book for children about magic and the whole Evil vs Good dichotomy.
Idiots -- Dumbledore is an evil manipulator, The Weasleys fed Harry love potions, the Malfoys are actually good but misunderstood, Voldemort is just insane because he made horcruxes, he was totally the kindest soul before it, etc...

This is the context. A book meant for children. There's magic and evil baddies our MC has to beat. That's all. If you really want to dig deeper into it, the canon view on it is still far more plausible than whatever fanon came up with. The first books are very kid-friendly. It's only in the later books that Rowling starts exploring more adults themes and fleshing out her existing characters. Voldemort is no longer the great baddy. For those on the side of "evil", he might even be an antihero. Dumbledore is no longer the kind mentor figure he used to be. He routinely uses Harry for his goals, them being completely defeating Voldemort. Because, guess what, part of growing up is understanding there are no universally good or evil people. You cannot apply this more mature logic of the later HP books to the first two, with their straightforward dichotomy. You can't try and rationalize the way Dumbledore chooses to protect the Philosopher's stone with a series of traps that seemed to be specifically designed such that it would look cool for an 11-yo to overcome. There wasn't any deeper meaning here. Rowling wanted Harry to have an interesting adventure with some scary traps, that's it. The later books are obviously taken a bit more seriously.